E-Course首頁

 114 學年度 第 1 學期 教育學系測驗統計博士班 林素微教師 認知心理學與教育測驗 課程大綱

課程簡介   Course Introduction
開課年度學期
Year / Term
114 學年度 第 1 學期
開課班級
Department
教育學系測驗統計博士班 測驗統計博二
授課方式
Instructional Method
課堂教學 、 中文
課程電腦代號
Course Reference Number
112013
課程名稱(中文)
Course Title(Chinese)
認知心理學與教育測驗
課程名稱(英文)
Course Title(English)
Cognitive Psychology and Educational Testing
學分數/時數
Credit Hours
3 / 3
必(選)修
Requirement / Elective Course
必修
授課老師
Instructor
林素微
助教
Teaching Assistant
上課時間
Meeting Time
星期五,節次C、D、E
上課教室
Classroom
ZB213
Office Hours
林素微:4444/89AB

獲獎及補助情形   Awards and Grants

聯合國永續發展目標 (SDGs跨域類別)   Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs
SDGs 04. 優質教育:確保有教無類、公平以及高品質的教育,及提倡終身學習

課程目標   Learning Objectives
1.提昇學生對於認知歷程方面的重要研究,以及教學應用和認知測驗發展的深度理解。
2.提昇學生對於探討認知與發展心理學對教育測驗意涵的理解,針對感興趣議題,進行文獻(含評量工具)閱覽和課堂分享與討論的主持。
3.學生能依據上述探討結果,針對特定議題進行革新的評量發展或量化(分類)方法應用規劃,並進行小樣本試用、結果分析和課堂的分享討論。

 

先修 ( 前置 ) 課程   Prerequisite
 

彈性教學規劃   Flexible Teaching/Planning Schedules
*本課程實施16+2週彈性教學方案,其中第17、18週之彈性規劃如下:
線上教學/討論
自主學習

課程大綱   Course Syllabus
週次
Week
課程單元大綱
Unit
教學方式
Instructional Method/Style/Teaching Style
參考資料或相關作業
References or Related Materials
評量方式
Grading
1 Introduction to Cognitive Psychology and Educational Testing Lecture and discussion  1,2,3,4   
2 Cognitive and Developmental Psychology and Educational Testing Issues Lecture and discussion  5,6,7   
3 Cognitive analysis and the validity of tests Oral report and discussion   
4 Cognitive component analysis and Automatic item generation Oral report and discussion  9,10   
5 Discussion of research ideas Propose ideas for discussion     
6 Cognitive analysis of test data Practical exercises  11,12,13   
7 Spring break      
8 Cognitive diagnosis analysis Practical exercises  14   
9 Research design of cognitive component analysis Example sharing and Practice     
10 Innovation plan of quantitative tool or quantitative research Oral report and discussion  15   
11 Plan of validity data collection Oral report and discussion     
12 Sharing of sample items or software trial Oral report and discussion     
13 Cognitive component analysis and standard setting Lecture and discussion  16   
14 Data analysis of cognitive diagnosis model Lecture and discussion     
15 Reading cognitive diagnosis Lecture and discussion     
16 Research of expert and novice Oral report and discussion     
17 Results of field trial Oral report and discussion      
18 Results of field trial Oral report and discussion     


單一課程對應校能力指標程度   The Degree to Which Single Course Corresponds to School Competence
編號
No.
校核心能力
School Core Competencies
符合程度
Degree of conformity
1 公民力 (Citizen) 4
2 自學力 (Self-learning) 5
3 資訊力 (Information) 5
4 創造力 (Creativity) 5
5 溝通力 (Communication) 4
6 就業力(Employability) 4

單一課程對應系能力指標程度   The Degree to Which Single Course Corresponds to Department Competence
編號
No.
類別
Category
系核心能力
Department Core Competencies
符合程度
Degree of conformity
01 系所 能分析與解釋量化與類別資料 3
02 系所 能批判量化研究設計 5
03 系所 能創新統計模式和評量工具(博) 3
04 系所 能整合科技進行測驗創新議題探討 4
05 系所 能發表測驗統計議題的論文 4
06 系所 能提供專業水準測驗與統計問題的諮詢服務(博) 4

單一課程對應院能力指標程度   The Degree to Which Single Course Corresponds to College Competence
編號
No.
院核心能力
College Core Competencies
符合程度
Degree of conformity
1 探究能力 5
2 語文與溝通能力 5
3 創新與實踐能力 5
4 專業知能 5


教科書或參考用書   Textbooks or Reference Books
館藏書名   Library Books
備註   Remarks
1. Mislevy, R.J. (2006). Cognitive psychology and educational assessment. In R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed.). Westport, CT: American Council on Education.
2. Mislevy R.J., Steinberg, L.S., Almond, R.G., Haertel, G.D.. & Penuel, W.R. (2003). Leverage points for improving educational assessment. In B.Means & G. Haertel (Eds.), Evaluating the effects of technology in education (pp. 149-180). New work: Teachers College Press.
3. Mislevy, R.J., & Risconscente, M. (2006). Evidence-centered assessment design: Layers, concepts, and terminology. In S. Downing & T. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development. Mahwah, NJ: Erbaum.
4. National Research Council (2002). Knowing what students know. J. Pellegrino, N. Chudowsky, & R. Glaser (Eds.). Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
5. Anderson, J.R., Greeno, J.G., Reder, L.M., & Simon, H.A. (2000). Perspective on learning, thinking, and activity. Educational Researcher, 29, 11-13.
6. Anderson, J.R., Reder, L.M. & Simon, H.A. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25, 5-11.
7. Anderson, J.R., Reder, L.M. & Simon, H.A. (1997). Situated versus cognitive perspective: Form versus substance. Educational Researcher, 26, 18-21.
8. Embretson, S.E. (1998). A cognitive design system approach to generating valid tests; Application to abstract reasoning. Psychological Method, 3, 380-396.
9. Bejar, I.I. (1993). A generative approach to psychological and educational measurement. In N. Frederiksen, R.J. Mislevy, & I.I. Bejar (Eds.), Test theory for a new generation of tests (pp. 323-357). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. 蘇義翔、洪碧霞(2015):基於認知成分之代數推理測驗自動化命題模式之發展。人文社會學報,11(2),133-162。
11. Graf, E. A. (2009).Defining mathematics competency in the service of cognitively based assessment for grades 6 through 8 (Research Report No. RR-09-42). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
12. Graf, E. A., Harris, K., Marquez, E., Fife, J., & Redman, M. (2009). Cognitively based assessment of, for, and as Learning (CBAL) in mathematics: A design and first steps toward implementation (Research Memorandum No. RM-09-07). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
13. Haberstroh, J.,Harris, K., Bauer,M.,Marquez, E., & Graf, E. A. (2010). CBAL mathematics final report 2009. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
14. Leighton, J. P., & Gierl, M. J. (2007). Cognitive diagnostic assessment for education. NewYork, NY: Cambridge University Press.
15. Hendrickson, A., & Mislevy, R.J. (2005). Cognitive based IRT models. In B. Everitt & D. Howell (Eds.), Encyclopedia of statistics in behavioral science, volume 2 (pp. 978-982). New York: josser-Bass/Wiley.
16. Newstead, S., Bradon, P., Handley, S., Evans, J., & Dennis, I. (2002). Using the psychology of reasoning to predict the difficulty of analytical reasoning problems. In S.H. Irvine &P.C. Kyllonen (Eds.), Item generation for test development (pp. 35-52). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

※請尊重智慧財產權,不得非法影印教科書※
※   Please respect intellectual property rights and do not illegally photocopy textbooks.  ※

教學方法   Teaching Method
教學方法
Teaching Method
百分比
Percentage
講述 35 %
討論 35 %
問題導向學習 20 %
分享 10 %
總和  Total 100 %

成績評量方式   Grading
評量方式
Grading
百分比
Percentage
個人口頭報告 15 %
個人書面報告 75 %
出席狀況 10 %
總和  Total 100 %

成績評量方式補充說明   
文獻探討書面報告30%,口頭報告5%。
評量工具或量化(分類)方法評述25%,口頭報告5%。
測驗發展或資料分析計畫書面報告30%,口頭報告5%。

30% of the literature discusses and written reports and 5% of oral reports.
25% of the review of assessment tools or quantitative (classification) methods and 5% of oral reports.
30% of the proposal of test development or data analysis and 5% of oral report.
 

課程大綱補充資料   Supplementary Material of Course Syllabus